Kalu Singh vs State of Rajasthan

Rejendra Saxena, J.—This is the second bail petition filed on behalf of the petitioner.

This Court vide its ordar dated 1081993 while rejecting petitioner''s earlier bail petition had directed that he shall ba at liberty to file fresh bail petition after the statement of Bheru Singh, Ram Lal, Jhuajhar Singh, Kishor Singh, Balu, Bheru and Devi Siogh ara recorded by the learned trial Judge. The learned trial Judge recorded the statements of PW 1 Bheru Singh, PW 2 Jhunjhar Singh, PW 3 Kishor Singh, PW 4 Devi Singh, PW 5 Bfaoor Singh, PW 6 Shami Ulla, PW 7 Balu and PW 8 Bheru Lal, wherein PWs 1 to 4 and 7 aud $ have been declared hostile as they did not support the prosecution case. It appears that thereafter co accused Bisban Singh was arrested and the trial Court vide its order dated 961994 ordered for de vono trial. The petitioner is under detention since 1091992 and the alleged 2 quintal and 40 kg. poppy husk, which was carried on a camel was not recovered from the actual physical possession of the petitioner. De novo trial would ineaa further unnecessary detention of the petitioner, which violates the petitioner''s right for speedy trial.

Therefore, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case as als '' the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and provisions of Article 21 of tha Constitution of India, I am of the considered opinioa that it is a fit case wherein the petitioner now deserves bail. Accordingly, this bail petition is allowed and it is ordered, that petitioner Kalu Singh be released on bail provided ho executes his personal bond for a sura of Rs. 41,000 (Rs. forty thousand) and furnishes two bound and substantial sureties for a sum of Rs. 20,000 each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his regular appearance before him on each and every date of hearing and whenever ordered to do so. The petitioner shall all of uniish a written undertaking to the effect that he shnil keep peace and be of good behavioui and shall not commit any offence under the NDPS Act, 1985 during the trial of this case.

Bail petition allowed.